The Right to Bear Arms

I would like to say that I am not a ‘gun nut’. I recently sold my guns to pay for car repairs. I need a car way more than I need a gun. I also am not a member of any of those silly-assed militia groups running around in the woods. I got my fill of running around in the woods with a loaded rifle in the Army. Not my idea of fun. I am not a member of the NRA nor do I subscribe to Soldier of Fortune magazine.

I am not a gun fanatic. What I am is an American who likes his various rights and liberties and won’t sit still while our elected officials slowly chip away at them.
Right now there is an e-mail going around stating “Obama’s new Attorney General, Eric Holder, has already said this is one of his major issues. He does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms.” It then invites you to vote in a poll taken by USA Today at this link: http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm.

I went to the link and was very pleased to see that 97% of the vote was for our right to bear arms. YAY! It is a truism when you say “make guns illegal and only criminals will have guns.” However, this isn’t what I am worried about. Our right to bear arms isn’t so we can protect ourselves from the anti-social members of our society. Nope. It is to protect us from our own government. Yep. Our bearing arms keeps them from turning into a (more) repressive body. We don’t need another King George III running the show. They have already forced us to wear seatbelts “for our own good.” Many states require auto insurance “for our own good.” These are relatively benign rules, and they do make sense, but where does it stop? Marijuana is illegal “for our own good” even though it has medical benefits when used properly. Back in the 1920s alcohol was illegal “for our own good.” Well, that just made a number of criminal organizations more powerful. Fat lot of good that did us. Now, before I go any further on a tangent, let me point out that when we let the government take away our rights “for our own good,” we are, in effect, being infantalized. It is assumed we are incapable of governing ourselves in our day-to-day activities. Where does it stop? Do we allow our rights to be chipped away until we end up eating dinner with a cop standing over us to make sure we eat our veggies? (I guarantee you’ll need to hold a gun to my head to make me eat brocoli.) All “for our own good?”
We, or at least I, are adults. We don’t need “Big Brother” deciding every little aspect of our lives for us. We have the Bill of Rights to prevent that very thing from happening. Take away one right, and the rest will be soon to follow. Today our guns, tomorrow…what? I’d rather not find out.

This has been a Wolf Rant

Advertisements

5 Responses to “The Right to Bear Arms”

  1. Brother Says:

    just keep that feeling. you are right. if you let them trough soon you will see what else they will take away from you!
    i heard this once form Friedrich Nietzsche i guess “among all those evils being unarmed can bring to a man, being derided is the greatest one!”
    being armed keeps a man’s mind mean that i have the power to lead my life and protect myself. you give up your arm you already gave up that feeling and then any junky punk can mog you, by the name of “enforcement” or “your own good” in the streets as well as in the parliament. your gun is your freedom. that gives you the right to fight for your way die trying. you can give up either but it will be your call not others who will decide for “your own good”.
    as we have a proverb here in Iran “amenity is the excellence of weeks!”

  2. Sparrowhawk Says:

    Hm… I have no firearm, and I still live my life… the only ones who try to take that away from me are politicians, especially those of the EU… which means they’re out of my reach – time for an Al Qaeda craft to land in one of their “parliaments.”

  3. clark Says:

    97%??? Jesus, we didn’t have 97% of Americans support the War against Iraq. And since both the AG and the President are on record as supporting the right of law abiding citizens to own weapons, I am left to suspect that your email was a first class phishing expedition and that you bit.

    clark

    • wulfmann Says:

      To be sure such phishing attempts do happen, but I didn’t click the link it provided. I opened another window and took the google route. Can’t phish me that way. The thing to remember is that these results are from people that bothered to vote…kinda like the last presidential election. If only 100 people voted on the USA Today site, then the results are based on that, not what the nation may or may not go with. In fact, the current vote is based on the 5,528,940 votes it has received. Now, just to be sure it is a straight vote, I went back in and voted a second time. Regrettably, it accepted the vote, so multiple voting is possible and this may skew the results.

  4. clark Says:

    If you went to a site using a web browser on your computer, then you executed the code on that site with your computer. That is what they want you to do. It is the JavaScript, Flash and Java applets on the host site that are the problem.

    The site was clearly a USA Today URL, but commercial sites can be hacked and malicious code set up.

    Odds of that happening are about the same as winning a small lottery. Bad guys hack USA Today, insert evil code, you run evil code with a computer that is not kept up to date with upgrades, and USA Today let evil code stay on server. Unlikely as hell

    But people do win the lottery.

    Anyway, back to the 2nd amendment. I disagree about the concept that if people have guns that somehow that prevent the government from become tyrannical. Show me anywhere in the world where the availability of guns has kept a government from becoming oppressive. And on the flip side, it is trivial to find a state that has a well armed and oppressed population. I site Iran, Iraq, Gaza, Africa (pick a country), etc…

    A militia with deer rifles and motivation would be crushed into a guerrilla movement 10 minutes after first contact. And a guerrilla movement with the FBI after them would not last long.

    I think that the government has to show a good reason before they restrict the population with a law. I see no reason, and therefore no reason for a law, to keep rifles and handguns away from law abiding people. That is why I support the 2nd amendment.

    Clark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: